From: Peter on
"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:cdqol5dtcbrblq4thus7k6pl807gn11at2(a)4ax.com...

>
> The way this falls in the thread, it seems as if you are saying that
> California is not part of the United States. Yes, I know that's not
> what you mean, but there *are* people who think that parts of
> California are part of some other planet.
>

Having had business deals out there, there are times when I had that
distinct impression. Especially true for those based in LaLa Land.


--
Peter

From: C J Campbell on
On 2010-01-23 14:46:44 -0800, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:

> C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:
>>> Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote:
>>>> Savageduck
>>>
>>>>> Yeeeees, but all of this is still hypothetical, and there is still no
>>>>> proof of intent to smuggle a weapon into Canada and possess it
>>>>> illegally.
>>>>
>>>> They don't need to do that.
>>>> You and your unlicensed firearm are in Canada. That is illegal.
>>>
>>> Technically no, it is not in Canada. People and goods are not in
>>> Canada until they clear immigration and customs.
>>
>> Technically they are in Canada.
>
> Not according to the law. Airports set aside areas that are legally
> outside of the host country.

Myth.

>
>> An illegal immigrant or smuggled item
>> is in Canada
>
> Not legally.

But they are still inside the host country and subject to its laws.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

From: Ray Fischer on
C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:
>> C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:
>>>> Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote:
>>>>> Savageduck
>>>>
>>>>>> Yeeeees, but all of this is still hypothetical, and there is still no
>>>>>> proof of intent to smuggle a weapon into Canada and possess it
>>>>>> illegally.
>>>>>
>>>>> They don't need to do that.
>>>>> You and your unlicensed firearm are in Canada. That is illegal.
>>>>
>>>> Technically no, it is not in Canada. People and goods are not in
>>>> Canada until they clear immigration and customs.
>>>
>>> Technically they are in Canada.
>>
>> Not according to the law. Airports set aside areas that are legally
>> outside of the host country.
>
>Myth.

Nope.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: C J Campbell on
On 2010-01-24 21:18:54 -0800, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:

> C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:
>>> C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:
>>>>> Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Savageduck
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeeeees, but all of this is still hypothetical, and there is still no
>>>>>>> proof of intent to smuggle a weapon into Canada and possess it
>>>>>>> illegally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They don't need to do that.
>>>>>> You and your unlicensed firearm are in Canada. That is illegal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Technically no, it is not in Canada. People and goods are not in
>>>>> Canada until they clear immigration and customs.
>>>>
>>>> Technically they are in Canada.
>>>
>>> Not according to the law. Airports set aside areas that are legally
>>> outside of the host country.
>>
>> Myth.
>
> Nope.

I would like to see some evidence that what you say is true.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

From: C J Campbell on
On 2010-01-24 21:18:54 -0800, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:

> C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:
>>> C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said:
>>>>> Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Savageduck
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeeeees, but all of this is still hypothetical, and there is still no
>>>>>>> proof of intent to smuggle a weapon into Canada and possess it
>>>>>>> illegally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They don't need to do that.
>>>>>> You and your unlicensed firearm are in Canada. That is illegal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Technically no, it is not in Canada. People and goods are not in
>>>>> Canada until they clear immigration and customs.
>>>>
>>>> Technically they are in Canada.
>>>
>>> Not according to the law. Airports set aside areas that are legally
>>> outside of the host country.
>>
>> Myth.
>
> Nope.

If you guys are thinking of the customs holding areas that are common
in international airports, those areas are within the territorial
limits of the host nation and subject to its laws. They are not legally
"outside of the host country." They are simply holding areas where
goods that have not cleared customs (and which may simply be in transit
and never clear customs) are stored. But they are legally within the
country. Commit a crime in there (a burglary, for example) and you will
be arrested and prosecuted according to the laws of the host country.
They don't need the permission of the UN to do it. These areas are
simply for the convenience of the country using them. They still belong
to the sovereign nation in whose territory they lie.

Every country has to have places where people and property can wait
until they are processed by customs and immigration. However, those
places are still inside the country. Canada may not be too upset with
you if you inadvertently bring a firearm into Canada as long as you
declare it to the customs official, but if you started threatening or
shooting people you would find very quickly that Canada considers even
these areas to be its sovereign territory. I would not try using
illegal drugs in those areas, either. The judge probably would not look
kindly on your claim that you were not actually in Canada when you
broke their laws.

If you are thinking of the case of Merhan Karimi Nasseri, the man who
has lived since 1988 at Charles De Gaulle airport in Paris, he was in
France the entire time he stayed at the airport, not some
extra-territorial area. He could not be deported because there was no
place to deport him to -- his country had ceased to exist. He could not
leave the airport because French authorities refused to grant him
refugee status or a transit visa. So he sat in the airport. Other
countries would have an immigration holding area for such people. These
areas are still part of the country where they are located, however, as
Charles De Gaulle Airport is part of France. Mr. Nasseri was in France,
albeit illegally and restricted to the airport because no one knew what
to do with him.

In fact, Mr. Nasseri was issued the necessary papers in 1999 and has
been free to travel anywhere he likes in Europe ever since. He had
become so institutionalized at the airport, however, that he never
left. He was hospitalized at the airport hospital in 2007 and
currently lives in a homeless shelter in Paris. He never made it to
England, which was his original destination. Mr. Nasseri insists that
he is an English national, not Iranian as his papers state, so he has
refused to sign the International Travel Card and French Residency
Permit issued to him. Nevertheless, the position of all European
governments is that these documents are valid whether he signs them or
not.

If you are thinking of the movie "The Terminal" starring Tom Hanks --
it is a movie filled with the typical Hollywood baloney. Hollywood has
never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Real American
airports are considered American territory.

Even the United Nations building is part of the United States. If you
burglarize it or try to blow it up (as some have attempted), you will
be sought by American authorities and prosecuted according to American
laws. This is true of every embassy and consular office in the US, too.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor